Question - "post ban-registered" AR, still have to be "compliant"?

[allen-1]

So, I have a couple of AR's that I registered after Sandy Hook. They were legally purchased in CT and met all of the requirements that were then in place, (max of two evil features). Muzzlebrakes are pinned, stocks are pinned, those deadly bayonett lugs have been removed if they were ever present.

The question is, now they're simply registered assault weapons. I have their certificates of registration, (with backup copies). So - do they have to stay in their current configurations, or can I unpin the stocks?

 

[Tweed]

you are in Georgia. Do what ever is legal there

 

[allen-1]

you are in Georgia. Do what ever is legal there

I'm in CT right now with one or more of my CT registered AR's.

 

[drgrant]

If dcmdon doesn't chime in here id pm him, he's up on CT law better than most.

 

[dcmdon]

An assault weapon is an assault weapon. You CAN legally modify it to "pre-ban" configuration.

I was a kitchen table 07 FFL when I lived in CT. I've still got a bunch of wholesale accounts. I've helped a number of people replace their pinned stocks and plain barrels.

Note - Pre-94 ban guns, unless they are named are NOT AWs per CT law. Its too late for a citation. But if anyone needs one, let me know.

 

[allen-1]

An assault weapon is an assault weapon. You CAN legally modify it to "pre-ban" configuration.

I was a kitchen table 07 FFL when I lived in CT. I've still got a bunch of wholesale accounts. I've helped a number of people replace their pinned stocks and plain barrels.

Note - Pre-94 ban guns, unless they are named are NOT AWs per CT law. Its too late for a citation. But if anyone needs one, let me know.

I replaced the furniture with Magpul and pinned it myself; one pin coming out...

 

[JAD]

An assault weapon is an assault weapon. You CAN legally modify it to "pre-ban" configuration.

I was a kitchen table 07 FFL when I lived in CT. I've still got a bunch of wholesale accounts. I've helped a number of people replace their pinned stocks and plain barrels.

Note - Pre-94 ban guns, unless they are named are NOT AWs per CT law. Its too late for a citation. But if anyone needs one, let me know.

I disagree with that claim. They are, by definition, assault weapons. However, they are exempt the general limitations on transfer and the registration requirement.

Sec. 53-202m. Circumstances when assault weapons exempt from limitations on transfers and registration requirements. Notwithstanding any provision of the general statutes, sections 53-202a to 53-202l, inclusive, shall not be construed to limit the transfer or require the registration of an assault weapon as defined in subdivision (3) or (4) of subsection (a) of section 53-202a of the general statutes, revision of 1958, revised to January 1, 2013, provided such firearm was legally manufactured prior to September 13, 1994.

It is important to note that the preban exemption does not apply select-fire firearms OR to firearms named by make/model or by type under the law in effect on 1 January 2013. (i.e. the only prebans that are exempt now are the prebans that were exempt under the old (pre PA 13-3/13-220) law)

 

[dcmdon]

JAD

Thanks for the clarification. I was incorrectly referencing some DPS guidance on the old law.

They are in fact assault weapons. The fact that they are exempt from limitations on transfers and registration requirements, makes them effectively "not" assault weapons.

I got caught in that trap. Thanks for keeping me honest.

JAD's disctinction is very important because there are additional restricting on transport in CT for AWs. See below.

Normally, there are no transport restrictions of any kind for firearms in CT, other than that long guns can not be kept loaded in a vehicle.

https://www.cga.ct.gov/2001/pub/Chap943.htm#sec53-205.htm


Don

From PA13-3

Sec. 29. Section 53-202f of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective from passage):

(a) While transporting an assault weapon between any of the places [mentioned] set forth in subdivisions (1) to (6), inclusive, of subsection [(d)] (f) of section 53-202d, as amended by this act, no person shall carry a loaded assault weapon concealed from public view or knowingly have, in any motor vehicle owned, operated or occupied by [him] such person (1) a loaded assault weapon, or (2) an unloaded assault weapon unless such weapon is kept in the trunk of such vehicle or in a case or other container which is inaccessible to the operator of such vehicle or any passenger in such vehicle. Any person who violates the provisions of this subsection shall be fined not more than five hundred dollars or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

 

[JAD]

JAD

Thanks for the clarification. I was incorrectly referencing some DPS guidance on the old law.

They are in fact assault weapons. The fact that they are exempt from limitations on transfers and registration requirements, makes them effectively "not" assault weapons.

I got caught in that trap. Thanks for keeping me honest.

JAD's disctinction is very important because there are additional restricting on transport in CT for AWs. See below.

Normally, there are no transport restrictions of any kind for firearms in CT, other than that long guns can not be kept loaded in a vehicle.

https://www.cga.ct.gov/2001/pub/Chap943.htm#sec53-205.htm


Don

From PA13-3

Sec. 29. Section 53-202f of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective from passage):

(a) While transporting an assault weapon between any of the places [mentioned] set forth in subdivisions (1) to (6), inclusive, of subsection [(d)] (f) of section 53-202d, as amended by this act, no person shall carry a loaded assault weapon concealed from public view or knowingly have, in any motor vehicle owned, operated or occupied by [him] such person (1) a loaded assault weapon, or (2) an unloaded assault weapon unless such weapon is kept in the trunk of such vehicle or in a case or other container which is inaccessible to the operator of such vehicle or any passenger in such vehicle. Any person who violates the provisions of this subsection shall be fined not more than five hundred dollars or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

I have a much more significant concern than the one that you brought up. What concerns me most is 53-202j, which imposes a particularly heavy mandatory minimum/non-suspendable sentence for A/B/C felonies committed by a person armed with, who threatans use of, who displays, or who represents that he possesses an assault weapon when the A/B/C felony was committed. (The sentence is consecutive to any sentence imposed for the underlying felony crime).

Sec. 53-202j. Commission of a class A, B or C felony with an assault weapon: Eight-year nonsuspendable sentence. Any person who commits any class A, B or C felony and in the commission of such felony uses, or is armed with and threatens the use of, or displays, or represents by his words or conduct that he possesses an assault weapon, as defined in section 53-202a, shall be imprisoned for a term of eight years, which shall not be suspended or reduced and shall be in addition and consecutive to any term of imprisonment imposed for conviction of such felony.

 

[JAD]

Please don't interpret my post to suggest that I condone or encourage any criminal activity, especially while armed with a firearm. What I am trying to suggest is that (as you know) whenever a serious (A/B/C) felony is committed with a firearm, there are very serious repercussions

Sec. 53-202k. Commission of a class A, B or C felony with a firearm: Five-year nonsuspendable sentence. Any person who commits any class A, B or C felony and in the commission of such felony uses, or is armed with and threatens the use of, or displays, or represents by his words or conduct that he possesses any firearm, as defined in section 53a-3, except an assault weapon, as defined in section 53-202a, shall be imprisoned for a term of five years, which shall not be suspended or reduced and shall be in addition and consecutive to any term of imprisonment imposed for conviction of such felony.

What I am trying to implore is that those consequences are even more serious when an assault weapon is introduced into the fold.

 

[dcmdon]

True. I was assuming that the person I was addressing was a peaceful non-aggressive person. (I don't say law abiding anymore whenever I think not to because there are a lot of peaceful CT residents who are felons per PA13-3)

In that case, the thing most likely to trip that person up is the transport restrictions. I always stick my guns in the back seat in soft cases without locks. That is illegal to do with an AW.

Don

 

[allen-1]

True. I was assuming that the person I was addressing was a peaceful non-aggressive person. (I don't say law abiding anymore whenever I think not to because there are a lot of peaceful CT residents who are felons per PA13-3)

In that case, the thing most likely to trip that person up is the transport restrictions. I always stick my guns in the back seat in soft cases without locks. That is illegal to do with an AW.

Don

Lot of good information here from both of you, thank you.

While transporting, the AR(s) are in hard-case(s). Inaccessible to driver/passenger, and no ammo in same case as rifle. Other rifles are unloaded, and also have no ammo in same case. Pistol(s), other than those under my direct control are unloaded. Any "large-capacity" magazines that I might have are unloaded unless I'm at the range.

 

[dcmdon]

Allen 1,

Much of what you mentioned above is unnecessary. I hate to see people cowed by a misunderstanding of the law.

"other rifles unloaded" - yes, required by law.
"no ammo in same case" - Unnecessary. You can drive down the road with an unloaded rifle across your lap and a loaded mag in your hand. All perfectly legal.

"Pistols other than those under direct control are unloaded" - Completely unnecessary. Are you from MA? That's a law in MA. Not CT.

"Any large capacity mags unloaded unless I'm at the range". - Assuming you declared them, then that is unnecessary. They can be transported with 10 rounds in them. Assuming they are not bound by AW restrictions I cited above.

(6) While transporting the large capacity magazine between any of the places set forth in this subsection, or to any licensed gun dealer, provided (A) such large capacity magazine contains not more than ten bullets, and (B) the large capacity magazine is transported in the manner required for an assault weapon under subdivision (2) of subsection (a) of section 53-202f of the general statutes, as amended by this act; or

Don

 

[JAD]

True. I was assuming that the person I was addressing was a peaceful non-aggressive person. (I don't say law abiding anymore whenever I think not to because there are a lot of peaceful CT residents who are felons per PA13-3)

In that case, the thing most likely to trip that person up is the transport restrictions. I always stick my guns in the back seat in soft cases without locks. That is illegal to do with an AW.

Don

I know that most of us don't go out committing felonies, especially high class ones. However, I think it is important to consider the types of charges that could result (for example) from a situation like home defense encounter, or something similar. Also, consider the potential in a domestic situation (with kids are present) for something simple like disorderly conduct or breach of peace to get a risk of injury (c-felony) charge tacked on.

 

[dcmdon]

Well, thankfully if I remember correctly they've removed the Select-fire language from the law. So if I'm going to stick someplace up, I'm going to use my machine gun since the penalties are less.

Don

p.s. To our Governmental overlords, the above was stated with humorous intent. However, it doesn't change the fact that there appears to be no "extra" penalties for committing crimes with either a full auto or select fire firearm. Whereas there is all kinds of extra goodness in the CGS for you if you commit a crime with an AW.

 

[JAD]

Well, thankfully if I remember correctly they've removed the Select-fire language from the law. So if I'm going to stick someplace up, I'm going to use my machine gun since the penalties are less.

Don

p.s. To our Governmental overlords, the above was stated with humorous intent. However, it doesn't change the fact that there appears to be no "extra" penalties for committing crimes with either a full auto or select fire firearm. Whereas there is all kinds of extra goodness in the CGS for you if you commit a crime with an AW.

The original definition of an assault weapon (from the 1993 law, with the 2001 type additions) was retained with minimal modification. Select fire firearms are still included under the definition of an assault weapon. (see PA 13-3 s. 25)

 

[dcmdon]

Hmm. I wasn't sure, which is why I was a little soft.

I searched for the link: https://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/TOB/S/2013SB-01160-R00-SB.htm

and couldn't find it. I must have missed it.

Well, then it still appears that you are better off knocking off a place with a pure machine gun vs an AW. Ha..